Chapter 1. Introduction
In the introduction of her book “IR Theory,” Cynthia Weber elaborates what International Relations is in a broader and wholesome context. She uses mainly three sub-headings in her introductory paragraphs namely Culture, Ideology, and myth function in IR theory.
In order to inculcate in a readers’ mind the critical ability, the author, first of all, refutes all the established or till now inferred meanings of Culture and Ideology and shows new dimensions.
In doing so she quotes some prominent writers and quotes them to define what the culture is.
“Culture is concerned with the production and exchange of meanings – the ‘giving and taking of meaning’ – between members of a society or group” (Hall, 1997)
“The social production and reproduction of sense, meaning, and consciousness” (John Hartley, in O’Sullivan et al., 1994)
“An ensemble of stories we tell about ourselves” (Geertz, 1975)”.
Then comes next in the row the term “ideology”
She says there are two types of ideologies, conscious ideologies and unconscious ideologies and here are examples of both.
Conscious ideologies                          Unconscious ideologies
Liberalism                                           Boys will be boys
Conservatism                                      America has a classless society
Socialism                                             English people are white
Feminism                                             Everyone I know is straight
Third and the main heading which is the central point or the main idea in her book is IR Myth. She says that an IR myth is an obvious reality, normally expressed as a slogan, here is an example, international anarchy is the permissive cause of war”; and “there is an international society.”
In order to describe her method, it can be said that mythology is her methodology.

Chapter 2. Realism
In this chapter, Cynthia says that international politics is anarchical because there’s no global government. A universal government that can rule all the nations at a time and can exercise her power to influence global politics cannot be established. So there will be constant international anarchy. In this chapter, she refers to Kenneth Waltz more than once and explains Kenneth’s theory of fear. Kenneth says that there prevails a constant fear among nations so they always try to accumulate wealth and gain power in order to sustain and maintain their liberty. Fear is the key factor that drives the nations and modifies their needs from time to time. A famous movie Lord of The Flies adapted from a famous novel is also referred to herein this chapter to give her ideas a more pragmatic and seemingly practical approach.

Chapter 3. Idealism
Idealists say that there is goodness in people that can be corrupted by bad organizations, bad institutions, and the bad government whether it be of national level or international. Cooperation amongst nations and states can reduce international anarchy. The myth that the anarchy is the permissive cause of war can be substituted by the myth that, “there is an international society”. According to idealists, it is only the bad form of organization that divides the people and division leads them to corruption.
Weber suggests that it should not be neglected that realism won the intellectual debate during world war II and the cold war period. She refers to Charles W. Kegley for a number of times but when it comes to the elaboration of his theory of International society, Weber says that Kegley actually never employed such a term in his essays nor its existence needs defending but without assuming that an international society exists Kegley’s whole argument makes no sense.
In this chapter, she used the Movie Independence-day for the depiction of idealism.

Third and last anarchy myth, “anarchy is what states make of it” shows a way out of dilemmas faced by researchers of International relations scholars. What states do depends on their cultural background, their interests, their identities, and people? Interests of the states change from time to time so no course of action is predictable in international politics.
Constructivists say the identities and interests are not stable in international politics. Weber says that constructivism provides solutions to all our problems in international politics.
Alexander Wendt in his essay in 1992 proposed a myth, “anarchy is what states make of it”.
In this chapter, the author has employed her technique to visualize the pragmatic form constructivism into the reader’s mind with the movie Wag The Dog.

Chapter 5. GENDER: Is Gender A Variable?
In this chapter, Weber has discussed the probability of gender being a variable. For a number of times she has referred to Adam Jones due to his essay Does Gender Make the World Go Round?
IR Scholars did their best to not to see the relevance of feminism, but that did not stop the feminists from rethinking key IR concepts like power through feminism. It was only in the late 1980s when feminist questions pushed their way onto the IR agenda through books, journals, and conferences that feminism suddenly seemed attractive to IR scholars.
Like our (neo)idealist myth “there is an international society” Jones’s myth “gender is a variable” is never defended by Jones. What is defended is the need to make feminist engagements with IR more balanced. If feminists want “women’s issues” and “feminine concerns” to be considered in IR, then IR scholars are right to insist that “men’s issues” and “masculine concerns” be given equal time.
Here the author has used the movie Fatal Attraction for the description of her theory and has suggested many books in order to fully comprehend the running theme in this chapter.

Chapter  6. GLOBALIZATION Are we at the End of the History?
In a nutshell, the author’s description of Globalization can be stated as under.
Liberal democracy has governed the world for many decades and according to Francis Fukuyama, it is the final form of government because liberalism has no internal contradictions and man’s ideological evolution has come to a point where an end is inevitable. According to Fukuyama, gone are the times when men squabbled over ideological differences, what needs to be done now is the need for spreading the liberal ideology on a broader scale.
Weber says that ‘it could not be more timely for Fukuyama to publish his theory of Globalization’ because right after a month the cold war was over as Fukuyama had predicted and people needed a new theory. Those who said that international politics is anarchical were hiding away and the USA had emerged as a global leader and people needed something that could explain contemporary politics. A question arises, what if liberalism stopped functioning?
In order to make liberalism function, it should be free of all the contradictions, both internally and externally. According to Fukuyama “liberalism” has no external threat that could cause any damage in both political and scholastic spheres.
Weber has used the movie the Truman Show for the comprehension of the IR term Globalization and has suggested some useful readings likewise.
Weber makes the aforementioned movie analogous to the ‘liberalism’ theory and says what will happen if there would be void and emptiness after the liberalism? If understood with its superficial entirety, Fukuyama says that there will be no other political system after liberalism.

Empire, a book by Michael Hardt, describes the postmodern world as an empire. According to Hardt empire is a coherent, comprehensive, and unified global political oppression. Empire is a new challenging threat to communism. IR scholars such as Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri were foreseeing anti-globalization protests in an answer to communism. Empire can be termed as the modern form of the proletariat that has to dwell in the long run of global politics because the international economy is the ultimate reality that could keep the nations united and lead to harmony and not anarchy.
Empire is in the formation phase before us” this is claimed by Hardt. They say that the globalization of cultural and economic exchange is also connected to the empire. Empire is an international disciplinary order that is strengthened when nations economically interact and are interdependent. Empire is not any one thing, a single unit, a single course of action, or natural phenomenon, rather it is an amalgamation of things, actions and all the global politics unified for one and single-purpose only and that is the global economy. Simply a multitude of global economy and business can be termed as an empire.
A movie named Memento has been used in this chapter by Weber for further elaboration and relevant books also been suggested by her.

Chapter 8. Modernization and Development Theory: Is there a Clash of civilizations?
9/11 changed the socio-political façade of the world. Hardt and Negri described the “new world order” as conflictual but not in terms that were meaningful to most after September 11, 2011. One scholar had, it seemed, provocatively predicted dramatic conflicts between
liberal and illiberal forces in a post-Cold War world. This was the American political
scientist Samuel P. Huntington, in his 1993 essay “The Clash of Civilizations.
Overall, the modernization and development tradition promises that, under the right social, political, and economic conditions, the difference will give way to social, political, economic, and cultural sameness, with Third World states modernizing and developing to become more like First World states. In so doing, it promises a better standard of living for people in Third World states, and it promises an increasingly secure world for First World states.
For further elaboration, the author uses the movie East is East to describe the Modernization and Developmental Theory vividly. Books have also been suggested by her to broaden the reader’s insight and help him/her to develop an instinct that could help to comprehend the IR phenomenon.

So far, the book concerns how meanings are produced, mythologized, circulated, and contested, as culture, ideology, and IR theory. This has been done by thinking broadly about culture and ideology and then using what has been learned about these concepts to consider what makes some of the stories IR theory tells about the world appear to be true. How this has been done? is by focusing on what is called IR myths, apparent truths on which IR traditions rely in order to appear to be true. And relationships have been considered among IR theory, IR traditions, and IR myths by consulting not only classic statements in the IR literature but popular ideas about international politics and everyday life found in popular films.
So, where does all of this leave us? Hopefully, it leaves us knowing “too much” about IR theory and IR myths – not because of what they say but because of what they do culturally and politically. Indeed, thinking about IR theory as a site of cultural practice through formal, academic cultural practices like writing IR theories and myths and through less formal cultural practices like popular films has demonstrated that all cultural sites are powerful arenas in which political struggles take place. And, maybe most importantly, this way of rethinking IR theory has helped us to rethink the relationship between culture and politics. Culture is not opposed to politics. Culture is political, and politics is cultural. What this means is that the cultural stories all of us tell – whether in film, in IR theory, or in everyday life – are political. Knowing how stories function – what makes them appear to be true – gives us the means to both critique and create politically powerful stories.

Post a Comment

Please your insights about the knowledge that is shared in this platform. after all, it's all about Yuu. Don't forget to share the post.

Previous Post Next Post